have been found to be Rhizarian filose amoebae (under Perlofilida), not opisthokonts. See: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1434461011001325...

like the Opisthosporidia. They are already included in the Template:Opisthokont protists as distinct from true fungi. Any thoughts on this? --Jules (Mrjulesd)...

(UTC) These nav templates here should be regrouped, just like {{Opisthokont protists}} was added in 2016, maybe Diaphoretickes recently identified as...

Question. Is there a reason Template:Taxonomy/Opisthokonta doesn't put Opisthokont as a clade for similar reasons? — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 01:14, 4 August...

Apusomonads and Ancyromonads and the Internal Relationships of Opisthokonts | journal = Protist | volume = 164 | issue = 1 | date = 2013 | pages = 2–12 | doi...

sure the problem is with the d@n#! protists, not you. But I wouldn't change anything you've done thus far with protists. You know, I keep trying to avoid...

there are a lot of such clades, and squeezing all these into "other opisthokonts" seems "rather anthropocentric" (this article is a fun read: Bonner,...